Using mobile telephones: cognitive workload and attention resource allocation

Effects of practice, age, and task demands, on interference from a phone task while driving

“…As such, the phone task can be dis-tracting, disruptive to driving, and potentially dangerous (Goodman, 1997;Goodman et al, 1999). This general conclusion is supported by laboratory and driving simulation studies (McKnight and McKnight, 1993;Alm and Nilsson, 1993;Strayer and Johnston, 2001), closed track road studies (Ishida and Matsuura, 2001;Hancock et al, 2003), and open road studies (Brown et al, 1969;Harbluk et al, 2002;Patten et al, 2004).…”

A decrease in brain activation associated with driving when listening to someone speak

“…The motivation for such legislation may initially have been concern about interference caused by holding and dialing a cellular phone, and early studies suggested that the manual aspects of cellular phone use were the critical determinant of a decrement in driving performance (Drory, 1985). However, recent behavioral studies have shown that simulated driving performance is also disrupted by conversations using hands-free devices Nilsson, 1994, 1995;Anttila and Luoma 2005;Beede and Kass, 2006;Brookhuis et al, 1991;Consiglio et al, 2003;Horberry et al, 2006;Hunton and Rose, 2005;Jamson and Merat 2005;Lamble et al, 1999;Levy et al, 2006;Liu and Lee, 2005;Matthews et al, 2003;Patten et al, 2004;Ranney et al, 2005;Shinar et al, 2005;Strayer and Drews, 2004;Strayer et al, 2003Strayer et al, , 2006Strayer and Johnston, 2001;Bolling, 2005, 2006;Treffner and Barrett, 2004), and epidemiological studies of real-world accidents suggest that users of hands-free phones are just as likely to have an accident as users of hand-held devices (Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997;McEvoy et al, 2005). In their meta-analysis of recent dual-task driving studies, Horey and Wickens (2006) concluded that the costs to driving performance resulting from a secondary simulated conversation task were equivalent for hand-held and hands-free devices.…”

“…In particular, multitasking of driving and conversing on a cell phone is technologically available, but intuitively seems dangerous in some circumstances. Although driving becomes sufficiently cognitively automated (Schneider, 1999) to permit experienced drivers to perform other tasks at the same time, such as carrying on a conversation, a large number of behavioral studies have now shown that performing another cognitive task while driving an actual or virtual car substantially degrades driving performance Nilsson, 1994, 1995;Anttila and Luoma, 2005;Beede and Kass, 2006;Brookhuis et al, 1991;Consiglio et al, 2003;Drory, 1985;Engström et al, 2005;Haigney et al, 2000;Hancock et al, 2003;Horberry et al, 2006;Horrey and Wickens, 2004;Hunton and Rose, 2005;Jamson and Merat, 2005;Kubose et al, 2006;Lamble et al, 1999;Lesch and Hancock, 2004;Liu and Lee, 2005;Matthews et al, 2003;McKnight and McKnight, 1993;Patten et al, 2004;Ranney et al, 2005; Nunes, 2000, 2003;Santos et al, 2005;Shinar et al, 2005; Drews, 2004, 2007;Strayer et al, 2003Strayer et al, , 2006Strayer and Johnston, 2001; Bolling, 2005, 2006;Treffner and Barrett, 2004). Although some of these studies show that some aspects of driving are unaffected by a secondary task (e.g., Haigney et al, 2000) and in some cases certain aspects improve (e.g., Brookhuis et al, 1991;Engström et al, 2005), a recent meta-analysis of the literature suggests a large overall decrement in driving performance when a secondary task is added (Horey and Wickens, 2006).…”

Miles away: determining the extent of secondary task interference on simulated driving

“…In combination with the results of previous studies (Kubose et al, in press;Patten et al, 2004;Sodhi et al, 2002) With a proliferation of driver information and entertainment systems being introduced into cars, it seems that vehicle designers must be ever more careful not to distract the driver on any attentional channel. However, there is some hope for accommodating technology while maintaining performance, in the shape of multisensory displays (Lansdown, 2001, Sarter, 2000 or integrated interfaces (e.g., Michon, 1993 .…”

“…Baber, 1991, Liu, 1996. Moreover, it is possible for a dual task experiment to compete for the same resource pool without adversely affecting the primary task (Baber, 1991); conversely, some studies have found that mental secondary tasks can affect vehicle control (e.g., Patten et al, 2004, Recarte and Nunes, 2002, Sodhi et al, 2002. Furthermore, there is evidence that there are other qualitative aspects of secondary tasks which can determine the extent of their interference effects, such as whether they are forced-pace or interruptible Kersloot, 2004, Noy, Lemoine, Klachon andBurns, 2004) .…”